3 ms·
That's great. After moving that function, rename the file in Vim to reflect the change. Just kidding. Made you sweat though, huh? Not knowing how to use a more
by stevebmark 8y ago
That's great. After moving that function, rename the file in Vim to reflect the change. Just kidding. Made you sweat though, huh?
Not knowing how to use a more productive IDE doesn't mean that Vim is more productive.
- yakshaving_jgt 8y agoYou believing that renaming a file is difficult in Vim shows that you don’t know Vim as well as you think you do. Here, I’ll do it completely from memory for you, while typing on my iPhone. :saveas newfile.ext<cr><c-^>:!rm %<cr><cr>:bd<cr> And of course, you could always use the command line to rename anything.
- stevebmark 8y agoI wrote a plugin to do it, which is way better than what you posted. And they're both way worse than an IDE. And the command line is least efficient of all for this task.
- yakshaving_jgt 8y agoI’d like to remind you that you are arguing about the efficiency of renaming a file. This argument is so nonsensical it doesn’t bear contemplating.
- stevebmark 8y agoyup, you're right, talking about concrete examples of efficiency in a thread about efficiency is "so nonsensical," which you only pointed out after posting dozens of keystrokes for something that takes two keystrokes in well designed editors.
- yakshaving_jgt 8y agoExcluding the filename and extension which would have to type out in any case, there are actually only 22 keystrokes there. So, not dozens. You could also not bother destroying the old buffer. You could also do: :!mv % newfile.txt<cr><cr>:e newfile.txt Again excluding the filename and extension, that's a total of 12 keystrokes. And again, this is not a task anyone spends much of their working life performing. Give up.
- sagartewari01 8y agoI guess the point is that even such small tasks require typing cryptic commands in vim.